I agree with Kid A that it seems to be more... "sissy-phobic"? Not to say that's any better. I feel like every company is now advertising their product as being for "tough men" (tacos, alcoholic lemonade, and body wash) or "sensitive women" (cereal, yogurt, and paper towels.) What ever happened to maximizing your audience? I don't get why any advertiser would want to alienate so many people.

Come on this is just humor in the way speed walkers walk. Let's get out of our victimized response to being gay. As was stated this has nothing to do with being gay unless your one who swooshes down the street like a speed walker. Well are you?

I posted this story on my blog also. And, as I said in my posting, even though it could be argued that this isn't necessarily an anti-gay ad, the image they chose to use is that of a thin, young man who "swishes" while walking. That clearly plays off of the stereotypical image that most of the ignorant and uninformed religious fanatics have of gay men. And, when we have a minister in Wisconsin calling on his congregation to literally shoot gay people, this becomes a very serious issue.

I think that snickers add makers and those pissing about the ad need to both grow up...As a gay dude... I don't take offense at this.. But as a member of a/the community I wonder why violence is used at all... Painting violence in a non serious matter desensitizes us to the dramatic effects of what we are exposed to and what we allow ourselves to be exposed to. If violence is condoned it will be perpetuated to great ramification. Lets not give a green light to violence of any kind...

I don't get how it's homophobic. I consider a real man anyone who is gay or straight. Man, male. In a point of being a sissy or a nancy who cares. I would rather be a nancy then Mr T. Reality is Speed walking is funny looking and Mr T I don't think I need to elaborate. The whole add is just pointless and dumb.

Food for thought. Anyone who thinks it's blatant. I know very few gay men who walk like that. I actually know no one who does nor anyone who power walks other then retired people at the mall. Just because someone is dressed like they are stuck in the '70 doesn't make them gay. Who is stereotyping? The add agency or people up in arms over it?

Of course many gay men don't walk like that, I don't. The fact is that is the stereotype of gay men, and Snickers tried to portray the man as one. Even if that was not the intention this is promoting violence against someone who displays a different gender identity than society has approved for ones sex.

Queer, I agree. Even if the man wasn't wearing an "I'm Gay" t-shirt, that's what Snickers was trying to portray. Any ad that tells men to "get some nuts" is attempting to further perpetuate the stereotype of what it means to be a "real man". That alone is enough reason for it to be pulled.

Update...HRC has contacted the Mars Corporation and they have pulled this commercial and apologized. I wonder if HRC will get further criticism for stepping in on this from some of the commenters on this site.

I am all for your cause and believe in all rights for all people, but this Ad wasn't that harmful, at all. Sure it's a bit down on people for being less of a man than Mr T. But who IS more of a man than Mr T?

I also thought R. Ray and her scarf was wrongly accused, but more so than this ad.

It's just ads, for shits and giggles, I would think that enlightened people like me and you won't put that much thought into a stupid ad, in the perfect world ?

It's just a 30 second commercial. I don't see it as homophobic at all. Are people that bored as to go looking for things to whine about? I could care less who Mr. T was launching candy bars at, it doesn't make a good commercial, that's why they pulled the advertisement. It wasn't because the "gay community" was up in arms about it. A few complainers online aren't enough to get an ad pulled from the airwaves.

This is absurd. Why do you assume that the speed-walking guy is gay? Seems like you - not the ad agency - are the ones stereotyping homosexuals (or speedwalkers...).

I thought that commercial was rather funny - if we can't laugh at people who sashay, who can we laugh at? And don't give me BS about "this encourages bullying". Bad parenting encourages bullying. This ad encourages laughter

What's sad is that men in this society are told the two worst things they can be are a/anything like a woman (sissy, effeminate, sensitive...which, by the way, is a HUGE insult to women...) or b/that they can be gay, and aren't the two the same thing at some point. Grow up America...there isn't anything wrong with being female-like or gay.

So...to continue, the crime of this commercial is that it tells men they aren't good enough if they're even slightly like a woman in anyway, and that they need to get "some nuts."...cuz really, anyone who's like a female is also probably gay...which = not good enough. It doesn't need to be more obviously anti gay...

people who complain about this add are the true homophobes. this add makes no reference to homosexuality. if you think it does then you have something wrong with your brain. im so angry about all the people campaigning against this add that i am going to start campaigning for this add. speedwalking man does not = gay man. its the self lothing homophobes who are making this connection as they are stupid idiots.

Wow... could you be more blind? "oh if you think this is gay-bashing you're the true homophobe"... cause we all know that now in the age of enlightenment gay men are NEVER stereotyped by the population as being 'sissy' types. And obviously for it to be anti-gay the guy has to be wearing a shirt that says "I'm a Homo! Ask me how!" Because subtlety is just NEVER used by the media to get certain messages across. Yeah, geniuses. You fail. This ad blows in every way. Learn to inference, pls.

Okay, I understand that you guys have best interests at heart for the LGBT community when you say those ads were offensive, but me and many of my friends are part of that community and we thought they were funny. However, I also don't agree with the comment about the "true homophobe" thing.

I think, in this one specifically, the target is a little sissy guy because Mr. T is so creepy and manly. Hence, opposites. If you ask me, it would have been funnier if a manly man was getting snickers tankfired at him, but whatever. And yeah, the kissing one would have been better if the "Do something manly" part hadn't been in it, but it also wouldn't have been funny. Yes, it's intolerant to a point, but you have to understand that there's a fine balance between entertainment and getting people to buy your crap when you're in advertising. Unfortunately, most peoples' sense of humor is dependent on someone getting embarrassed, regardless of how. Look at all of the negative ads Burger King runs. They don't target a specific group, but they're still horrible, and they have been for years, but you don't see anyone making a fuss about that, now do you?

I don't really see Snickers as trying to alienate gayness, but more as trying to incorporate it casually. Like I said, I DON'T agree that freaking out about this is something to be, in turn, also freaking out about, but it's only alienating the community more to show this kind of incredulity. So like I was saying, if you're going to protest one (or in this case, two) negative ads, make a point about all of them, not just those that could potentially be against you. It would definitely have a bigger impact.